IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] [homenet] Tsinghua work on source/destination routing

Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> Fri, 08 November 2013 02:44 UTC

Return-Path: <owen@delong.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DF3711E81FA; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 18:44:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.374
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.374 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.225, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vb293f3L-ynD; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 18:44:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C11821E80F4; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 18:44:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.20.72.215] (63-235-172-7.dia.static.qwest.net [63.235.172.7]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id rA82ct5Z013553 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 7 Nov 2013 18:38:56 -0800
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com rA82ct5Z013553
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1383878352; bh=N08vyre+erX5G3lix3bAakYdVjU=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=YajQ79gg0ct2CRuHOHM8s4VYhMnuZkN34g7fB0eh76TWG1yHDWPQYrmOfVbB4YMXn MrNxOzAT+G8nkqZl1N9/IL/UTULAy/cO9U9BQRt+z03WXmJ6KJt66Q9LbyTTHxS30w Y5AyIX9lr+ESMuo9d8S4Ztr/QttFtMmZvfpFTuGY=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFU7BATOG_Y4UtpRM9hu1qH7rV8_cxo0XHghrNt0xr5WUZuhiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 18:38:46 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E06460D8-E347-40F3-A72E-6177C7817CB5@delong.com>
References: <F7C18630-1964-4AFD-8549-559D7582B114@cisco.com> <CAFU7BAQT=+B==8pvOYSsWnCvcMEVzy2nh8dAZZXHzYjwmedRpg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJE_bqfU8C+Tc2rQCZ=vpmfTDdOiGz-sd-G4QNBpHdwXDz9bqQ@mail.gmail.com> <27F73F5B-6095-43E1-ADBE-2E05E8071E3F@cisco.com> <527BE84E.2000205@gmail.com> <CAFU7BATOG_Y4UtpRM9hu1qH7rV8_cxo0XHghrNt0xr5WUZuhiQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Thu, 07 Nov 2013 18:39:12 -0800 (PST)
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>, 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>, Routing WG <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] [homenet] Tsinghua work on source/destination routing
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 02:44:31 -0000

On Nov 7, 2013, at 3:33 PM, Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Brian E Carpenter
> <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> I suspect it's some of each. The host should, I should think, set the hop limit to one on any packet that is to a link-local address, to ensure that the packet is not repeated by a broken router (apart from protocols that ask to have it set to 255 and have the receiving host check for that value). Also, upstream network's BCP 38 implementation sounds suspect, and I'm with Jen in wondering why a router forwarded the packet in the first place.
>> 
>> Are you sure these packets come from hosts? There is a known case
>> which is a router generating ICMP reply packets that has no GUA
>> configured since all its peers are link-local.
> 
> I saw packets with link-local source/GUA destination coming from hosts
> and from routers (I analyzed EUI-64-based IIDs) back in 2011. Now
> majority of such traffic is TCP to our services and, again, IID checks
> shows that these packets are from hosts.
> 

It is not wrong for a node {host, router} to emit a packet with a link-local source and a destination in another scope.

It is wrong for a router to forward a packet containing a link-local scope address (source or destination). It is wrong to do so regardless of whether the outgoing link is the same as the incoming link or not.

Owen

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email